Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Technically Article One, Clause 5 of the Constitution is worded vaguely enough (treason, bribery, or any "high crime) that basically the Senate could impeach anyone in politics if they can find the right way to come at it.

Practically? That's harder because... we forget but it's never actually happened. Johnson and Clinton were both acquitted and Nixon pulled a "You can't fire me I quit" and was then pardoned. Technically speaking we've never had a President impeached. It's hard to argue precedent or trends based on a simple of "Almost one"

__________________"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

Technically speaking we have had two presidents impeached--both Clinton and Johnson. Impeachment is essentially like an indictment; a finding that sufficient evidence exists to warrant a trial. It is true that neither Clinton nor Johnson was convicted in the trial or removed from office, but both were impeached.

Technically speaking we have had two presidents impeached--both Clinton and Johnson. Impeachment is essentially like an indictment; a finding that sufficient evidence exists to warrant a trial. It is true that neither Clinton nor Johnson was convicted in the trial or removed from office, but both were impeached.

Point. Amend to "Removed via impeachment" and the point stands.

__________________"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

Yeah, this question can't be answered because it's political and not legal. Trump could be impeached if it's the political will of the people expressed through their elected representatives. Or he could be removed from office if it's the political will of the people expressed through means so outrageous that their elected representatives would be powerless to stop it.

Either way, it's not happening without some major developments in the various cases against him.

As I understand it, there's some debate as to whether the emoluments clause is actually violable as written. But that's a moot point, because it's really a political question, as has already been pointed out.

Basically, there are two ways the President gets impeached: One is that he pisses off Congress so much that they decide to impeach. Obviously it's easier to piss off Congress if Congress is dominated by the opposition party, and then you do something stupid like commit perjury.

The other way for the president to get impeached is if he pisses off the public so much that Congress has no choice but to impeach, to satisfy their constituents.

Neither of those scenarios is looking likely, for the Trump administration. The GOP is full of anti-Trumpers who never wanted him to be President. But they know which side their bread is buttered on, and are going to continue working with him at lest nominally, as long as they can. He would have to do something really egregiously bad, in order for them to seriously consider impeachment.

In practical terms the Democrats have to have a slam dunk with evidence so bad it would force enough vulnerable Republicans to vote for impeachment. They really need the pee video. Esoteric banking violations and campaign finance violations won't do. They need, a smoking gun on Russia qui pro quo. It's got to be a smoking gun even the people who go to his rallies would understand (not that their kind would care).

In practical terms the Democrats have to have a slam dunk with evidence so bad it would force enough vulnerable Republicans to vote for impeachment. They really need the pee video. Esoteric banking violations and campaign finance violations won't do. They need, a smoking gun on Russia qui pro quo. It's got to be a smoking gun even the people who go to his rallies would understand (not that their kind would care).

That didn't happen while he was President. If they could prove that he gave in to Russian blackmail because of it after taking office, you might have something.

You could have footage of Donald Trump eating the Lindbergh baby in a board room with Skeletor, Doctor Claw, Cobra Commander, Megatron, Mumm-ra, Shredder, Gargamel, and Rita Repulsa and "Whataboutism" would still prevent it from sticking.

And yes that would work the opposite direction as well.

__________________"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

__________________"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law

You could have footage of Donald Trump eating the Lindbergh baby in a board room with Skeletor, Doctor Claw, Cobra Commander, Megatron, Mumm-ra, Shredder, Gargamel, and Rita Repulsa and "Whataboutism" would still prevent it from sticking.

And yes that would work the opposite direction as well.

You might have better luck if you can put him on trial for eating the Lindbergh baby, and then somehow get him to lie under oath about Skeletor being present at the time.

You could have footage of Donald Trump eating the Lindbergh baby in a board room with Skeletor, Doctor Claw, Cobra Commander, Megatron, Mumm-ra, Shredder, Gargamel, and Rita Repulsa and "Whataboutism" would still prevent it from sticking.

And yes that would work the opposite direction as well.

ETA: if Mueller concludes Trump didn't collude with Russia, the collusion narrative will collapse. Most Democrats aren't going to conclude there was some nefarious plot by Mueller and Rosenstein to clear Trump. Now picture the opposite happens and Mueller concludes there was collusion. What do you think most Republicans will think? That Mueller is part of a "deep state" plot. That's the difference between the two parties now. One is somewhat rational, the other has gone insane.

ETA: if Mueller concludes Trump didn't collude with Russia, the collusion narrative will collapse. Most Democrats aren't going to conclude there was some nefarious plot by Mueller and Rosenstein to clear Trump. Now picture the opposite happens and Mueller concludes there was collusion. What do you think most Republicans will think? That Mueller is part of a "deep state" plot. That's the difference between the two parties now. One is somewhat rational, the other has gone insane.

I'm saying the people in power will always, within a rounding error, find a way to rationalize an after the fact excuse to defend the tribe that put them in power.

__________________"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

Let's pretend evidence comes out of a recent Trump affair, an illegal payment by Trump to keep it quiet, (maybe a campaign finance violation or something), and also Trump got the woman pregnant and paid for an abortion. Would that be enough to impeach and convict?

I've been casually perusing the web for grounds to impeach Trump, and so far all I can find is for violating the emoluments clause.

I think that's probably enough, but it seems like there should be more? Opinions?

The unanswered question is why has Trump been so wildly enthusiastic about being BFFs with V. Putin. There is broad suspicion, including by Steve Bannon, that Trump laundered a lot of Russian money through his properties. If that could be proven, it would raise doubts about every aspect of his foreign policy. I dunno whether that would be enough to impeach and remove him, but the threatof impeachment might be enough to force him to resign, as happened with Nixon.

If Democrats take the House or Senate, the law gives certain committee chairmen the authority to obtain and release the President's (or anybody's) tax returns. They likely contain evidence that we can't even imagine.

Let's pretend evidence comes out of a recent Trump affair, an illegal payment by Trump to keep it quiet, (maybe a campaign finance violation or something), and also Trump got the woman pregnant and paid for an abortion. Would that be enough to impeach and convict?

*Clears throat*

"But Clinton..."

__________________"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

Won't happen, regardless of the why's and wherefore's of the process. Because the Dems would rather have a colossal ass-clown screwing up their opposition's future than going to all the trouble and effort to get rid of him only to have to deal with the heartless Heydrich waiting in the wings to take over.

__________________...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornetsí nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015

Won't happen, regardless of the why's and wherefore's of the process. Because the Dems would rather have a colossal ass-clown screwing up their opposition's future than going to all the trouble and effort to get rid of him only to have to deal with the heartless Heydrich waiting in the wings to take over.

That's another thing. Outside of a symbolic and moral victory... what would getting rid of Trump actually do?

You'd have Pence. Then Ryan. Then Hatch. And so forth and so.

Sadly for the tribes you can't just mass impeach an entire party.

__________________"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

Let's pretend evidence comes out of a recent Trump affair, an illegal payment by Trump to keep it quiet, (maybe a campaign finance violation or something), and also Trump got the woman pregnant and paid for an abortion. Would that be enough to impeach and convict?

His defense would be that all of that happened before he was elected and had nothing to do with his performance of his presidential duties. The Repubs certainly wouldn't impeach him for that, let alone convict.

I think the only hope for impeachment is Mueller's investigation turns up so much **** the public pressures the Congress. There will still be a core of diehards in the Congress and in the public. There will be the CTers that don't believe the Mueller report.

But if there are incriminating phone calls in Cohen's recordings, especially if it is Trump calling his core base chumps, if Trump's taxes are released (there is something in a state court that might do that), if money laundering, conspiring, or who knows what criminal conduct is in evidence, the remaining normal Americans may well pressure the remaining normal Republicans in the Congress to stand up.

In addition, if Trump's mucking around with tariffs goes south, and more and more failures become undeniable such as no wall, Kim J-Un blasts more missiles, the lack of any replacement for the ACA affects more and more people... there are things that might change even given the make up of the Congress.

__________________Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Let's pretend evidence comes out of a recent Trump affair, an illegal payment by Trump to keep it quiet, (maybe a campaign finance violation or something), and also Trump got the woman pregnant and paid for an abortion. Would that be enough to impeach and convict?

We can only imagine the sandstorm (to put it politely) of denial, obfuscation, fake stories, "But Hillary ...", investigations of investigations, yadda yadda, that would ensue. The air won't clear for years, and Republicans can always insist that there can be no moving on until it does.

__________________It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150

You could have footage of Donald Trump eating the Lindbergh baby in a board room with Skeletor, Doctor Claw, Cobra Commander, Megatron, Mumm-ra, Shredder, Gargamel, and Rita Repulsa and "Whataboutism" would still prevent it from sticking.

And yes that would work the opposite direction as well.

Hell no. If Hillary colluded with a hostile foreign power and had the laundry list of crap that trump has we'd be calling for her head.

You could have footage of Donald Trump eating the Lindbergh baby in a board room with Skeletor, Doctor Claw, Cobra Commander, Megatron, Mumm-ra, Shredder, Gargamel, and Rita Repulsa and "Whataboutism" would still prevent it from sticking.

And yes that would work the opposite direction as well.

This is something I don't get about the "both sides do it" people. Is quality the only metric, or does quantity factor into deciding which side is actually worse?

"The only honest answer is that an impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers [it] to be at a given moment in history; conviction results from whatever offense or offenses two-thirds of the other body considers to be sufficiently serious to require removal of the accused from office."

Trump isn't going to be impeached. Although a Democratic-majority House could vote to impeach there wouldn't be a two-thirds majority in the Senate, and a failed attempt would only make him stronger.

IMO he's guilty of obstruction of justice. I would even say treason, if he didn't have the right to declassify any material he chooses too.

Anyway, removal from office would leave us with Pence. Although I think he would be a slight improvement in foreign matters, domestically he might be worse.

That's another thing. Outside of a symbolic and moral victory... what would getting rid of Trump actually do?

You'd have Pence. Then Ryan. Then Hatch. And so forth and so.

Sadly for the tribes you can't just mass impeach an entire party.

So?

You seem to be equating Trump to any other Republican. Yes, Pence is a homophobic bigot. Yes, Ryan is a corporate shill. Yes, Hatch is a ...(I donít actually know much about Hatch).

But none of them (or, at least, two of them) are dangerously incompetent. None of them are going to blunder us into a war after estranging us from all of our international allies because of a warped sense of entitlement and ability.

I might disagree with a Republican President, but itís not an existential threat to the US. Trump is already breaking down US principles, relationships, and infrastructure. Iím not entirely sure we will recover from all of it.

So, yes, give me President Pence over a fascist emperor with no clothes.

__________________"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"Itís easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.

Whatever justifies your Whataboutism and maintains the balance of power between the tribes so nothing ever gets accomplished.

It has nothing to do with whataboutism, it has to do with precedent. You went for the Ēwill no one think about the childrenĒ claim. To be perfectly honest, you would be hard pressed to find a president that someone has not claimed has scarred shildren, most recently Obama scarred plenty of children (hell in Yemen he didnít just scar them, he blew them into tiny bits on the way to a wedding).

Now if you were calling for Obamaís impeachment for scarring children, I will withdraw my comment.

It has nothing to do with whataboutism, it has to do with precedent. You went for the Ēwill no one think about the childrenĒ claim. To be perfectly honest, you would be hard pressed to find a president that someone has not claimed has scarred shildren, most recently Obama scarred plenty of children (hell in Yemen he didnít just scar them, he blew them into tiny bits on the way to a wedding).

Now if you were calling for Obamaís impeachment for scarring children, I will withdraw my comment.

What do you think "Whataboutism" is?

You're entire argument is "But the other side got to do it!" (or do something similar, or literally did anything ever.)

__________________"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en

"Stupidity does not cancel out stupidity to yield genius. It breeds like a bucket-full of coked out hamsters." - The Oatmeal

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.